REI Warranty?

I’d say it’s a personal call. Why are you returning it? In most cases I would say you’re good to return it. A small hole isn’t a big deal.

Mainly, I would just like to exchange it for one without a hole in it. To me, it doesn’t seem right. But if REI’s policy allows for this type of exchange, I would like to take advantage of it before my year is up.

That’s about the one reason I personally wouldn’t exchange it. I think the policy allows it so nothing is stopping you there.

Me, if it was my fault would send to BA for repair. And expect to pay for said repair.

If it was a manufacturing defect or something along those lines I’d say go ahead and return it. Since your dog put the hole in the mesh I’d say that while you could get it exchanged, I personally believe thats above and beyond what the return policy was intended to cover.. Could you? Sure. Should you? IMHO, nope.. I’d send it in to BA and see what they say about getting it repaired. That’s my 2¢.

If this is considered unethical, I am absolutely against it.

Unless you feel that what the dog did should not have resulted in the hole, then yes it would be unethical (under the new policy and the old policy).

REI will take it back.

unethical scum do these types of return scams all the time.

The return policy is supposed to cover if you are dissatisfied with the product for any reason. As Ben said, if you are dissatisfied that the product formed a hole from the dog, expecting that the product should not have performed this way, then go for it. But if you feel that the damage the product suffered is reasonable and expected given the treatment it received then it sounds as though your own conscience would steer you away from returning it.

Thank you all for the helpful insight. Much appreciated!

What happened was, my dog heard someone we were with outside of the tent in the morning and reached up and pawed at the mesh and his claw tore a small hole in it. I will just put a Gear Aid bug mesh repair patch (the kind with the tenacious tape) on there and move on. So the damage done is something that could be expected from a dog’s paw, I would imagine.

Thanks again!

Seems like you are wanting to make a conscientious effort to find the morally reasonable line, with a desire to stay on the “right” side of it, which is a lot more than what many folks out there would do so kudos for that. FWIW, from what you describe I for one think your decision properly reflects staying on the side of that line you want to stay on.

returns like that are why they changed their policy.  Your dog screwed up the tent – not REI and not the manufacturer.

Shame on you for being so high and mighty, condescending, and judgmental. It was a simple question that has long been resolved so any further input is unwarranted, much less a response to this effect.

nothing “high and might” about it.  it was wrong to even ask in the first place.  misuse or abuse of gear is not a legitimate reason to take it back for a refund.  as I said, that is why they had to change their policy – too many people taking advantage of it.  Because of that, anyone that had a legitimate reason to return an item beyond the current policy can no longer do so.  so the actions of others have consequences.  pretty simple thing to understand.

Well it’s good to know there are people here like yourself who know everything about everything. Thanks for keeping everyone in check!

What you did was reasonable (take the dog backpacking).

What the dog did was reasonable (reacted to someone outside the tent).

What the tent did was reasonable (tore due to the dog’s claw).

What REI did a while back was reasonable (put a limit to their previously unlimited return policy due to the number of returns that were clearly over the line).

OP, thanks for asking.  I wouldn’t return it in a case like that.  If manufacturers tried to build tents to be dog-proof in all instances, there would be no tents under 15 pounds.

I don’t want to imply anything about Erich, but James, the OP’s question is the sort of question I’d suggest any of the “somewhere on the spectrum” math students I coach (some types of giftedness and autism have a lot of overlap) do when in a new situation: Ask for guidance from people who are familiar with the social norms.  I should have done that myself the first time I went to a wedding.  It is also possible for people without any social issues to have been REI members for less than my 39 years, to not have returned various items to REI over the years, and not to have worked in a backpacking store themselves.  Safeway, for example, is fine with your bringing back any food that tasted funny to you or simply wasn’t want you wanted.

What a lot of people who haven’t worked in “hard goods” (tents, skis, stoves, etc) don’t realize is how tight the margins are on those items – even more so now with Amazon, etc.  People will shop endlessly to save a few bucks so it’s hard to pay for retail space, employees, utilities, stocking, restocking, insurance, taxes, etc.  The saving grace is someone will, on a whim, buy an electric-avocado-colored Patagonia puffy for $195 full price and that is what covers retailing of the hard goods.

. …

Since Eric is so appalled by James’ response I am compelled to comment that I am appalled that he had to ask the question in he first place.  Don’t people learn personal responsibility these days. I wonder how old Eric is? Hopefully more than 8. Probably under 35.

Do not forget to hit the unhelpful tab when done reading

Cheese and rice kids.

Erich, try stitching the hole by hand. One thing I do at the end of the seam is add a small dab of silicone sealant with a tooth pick to keep it from undoing. The repair looks much nicer and less noticeable than using tape.

First off, Ed, James edited his response. He removed the final line that read:

“Shame on you for even asking the question and shame on anyone that think’s it’s ok to return the item.”

I apologize if you are offended by my inquiry. I do not apologize, however, for asking the question.

Thanks JP for the tip on sewing it and thanks to everyone else who offered helpful input.

The matter is taken care of now and should not warrant any further insight (or judgment from the morality police)!

Thanks again!

it was wrong to even ask in the first place.

As someone who studies moral philosophy, that is one of the strangest ethical positions I’ve seen in a long time. It’s morally wrong to earnestly consult a wider, trusted community about norms and then take their advice!?

Look, I understand being thrown by the question. Too often I’ve seen people ask things like this and then insist that a return is justified, despite overwhelming consensus to the contrary. But Erich didn’t do that! He humbly accepted the counsel of his peers.

So get off the guy’s back. He’s an example of how things should be done.

it was wrong to even ask in the first place.

As someone who studies moral philosophy, that is one of the strangest ethical positions I’ve seen in a long time. It’s morally wrong to earnestly consult a wider, trusted community about norms and then take their advice!?

I agree with Mitchell. Hopefully, by the time we are adults, we have formalized a personalized philosophy to guide us through life. But things come up that may or may not be crystal clear to us. If philosophy, morality, and ethics were simple, Aristotle would have been the last philosopher.

To the OP, when we purchase something, we need to understand the purchase is a fair trade between the seller and the buyer. Both parties agree to the intended use and the warranties. We agree to use it as intended, and the seller agrees to replace or repair it per the terms of the warranty. If we are unsure, the best course is to be completely honest with the seller and let the seller decide. Sometimes sellers will warranty someting that is not covered in order to create good will and retain the customer. Your question was in good faith, therefore legitimate.

These conversations are good.

We had a similar debate here a few years ago and I was almost universally chastised by the entire BPL community when I took the stand it was immoral to take free condiments from fast food restaurants in quantities greater than the serving size for the food purchased, with the intended purpose to use them backpacking. Many people said it is okay because the fast food industry is run by evil corporations, or their need for free condiments was greater than the need for the evil corporations to make additional windfall profits. Much different than this thread.

It is no good that we cannot tell when a post has been edited anymore.

It is no good that we cannot tell when a post has been edited anymore.

I agree. Someone changing a post, especially an early post, can change to context and thought flow of every post below it. Sometimes good honest posts can turn into something else based on a single edited post.